A Roundup of Dec. 8 School Board Meeting
The proceedings of the meeting included receiving an interim report on the San Bruno Park School District's financial stability and a presentation from the polling firm slated to gauge the public's interest in a bond measure.
Here is a roundup of tonight's San Bruno Park School Board meeting.
Deficit expected for next two years, report says
The school district is expected to run a deficit for the next two years, Associate Superintendent Lynn Orong said in an interim budget report, which gauges the financial stability of the district.
According to the report, the district's $22.5 million in expenditures this year are expected to exceed revenues of $17.5 million, which would leave the district with a $4.9 million deficit.
The district's property tax revenue is expected to decline this fiscal year by 14 percent, or $3 million. As a result, the board agreed last week to reorder its list of priorities for using money from the sale of the former Carl Sandberg site, which will allow the district to use $5.46 million of the proceeds to balance the budget. However, the district is only allowed to use that money once to pay for expenses related to the general fund.
Next year, the report said, the district is expecting $18.6 million in expenditures but only $18.1 million in revenue. While there will still be a deficit, Orong said, the district should still be able to remain in the black because of the use of money left over from the previous year.
Trustee James Prescott said having a budget deficit two years in a row shows a fundamental flaw in school district spending and called out district staff in its oversight of the budget.
"The bottom line is we're deficit spending as a district," Prescott said. "Even when we approve this (report) and send it off, they're going to say nothing is wrong with the district. But, in reality, there is something wrong with the district."
In response, Orong defended the district's handling of the budget and blamed the district's budget woes on a combination of the economic decline and the 14 percent decline in property tax revenue.
Only few would vote if bond measure put on ballot, pollster says
Wanting to hear the district's options for possible alternative revenue sources, the district heard from Dale Scott, who runs the polling firm selected at a cost of $25,000 to gauge the public's interest in a bond measure.
Scott gave a breakdown of the district's voting population who would be casting ballots in an election, and the numbers were somewhat startling.
While there are 17,122 registered voters who would be able to vote on a bond measure, Scott said, the district should only expect about 2,600 voters to actually participate in the election. That would leave about 15,000 people whom the district would have to reach out to.
To do this, Scott said, his company would be looking to randomly poll 350 people by phone.
Anticipating that many San Bruno residents might be reluctant to pass another bond measure, Superintendent Dr. David Hutt suggested the polling firm also ask people whether they would support another revenue-saving option such as consolidating schools in the district.
In another presentation, Hutt honored four San Mateo Union High School District bus drivers who were instrumental in transported students from Crestmoor and Portola elementary schools following gas leak scares in the days following the Sept. 9 fire.
In other action, the board voted to appoint trustee Jennifer Blanco as the new president. Every year, the board members, who are elected at-large, take turns serving as president.
Adriana Arambula
10:08 am on Thursday, December 9, 2010
Great article, Great job
There are other alternatives, other than property tax, let's put our heads together for the voters in SB to agree in a measure, that is a crucial for the education of our future, our children.
Heidi Beck
7:46 pm on Thursday, December 9, 2010
I'm getting tired of construction bonds as a way to bypass the unpopularity of parcel taxes. Yes, sometimes they are necessary for school modernization and to free up funds that can then go to the general fund, but we can't rely on bond measures to solve our schools' fiscal woes. What do you propose as alternatives to a parcel tax?
Martin Ricard
6:16 am on Friday, December 10, 2010
Does anyone know of any good studies, articles or videos that speak to the issue of public school funding in a new and insightful way? If so, please add them to this discussion. Are there, as the previous two posts ask, other ways of funding public schools in San Bruno without having to pass a parcel tax?
Martin Ricard
9:31 am on Friday, December 10, 2010
Speaking of school funding, check out this San Mateo County Times story today about several Redwood City families who have joined a statewide lawsuit seeking equitable funding for public education. Among the reforms they are seeking: "increasing students' access to quality teachers and giving families the ability to transfer their children from underperforming to higher-caliber schools." Sound familiar? http://www.mercurynews.com/san-mateo-county/ci_16823428
Heidi Beck
11:24 am on Friday, December 10, 2010
There are quality teachers and bad teachers in ANY school, underperforming or not, so I don't see that as the solution. Funding is a huge issue, but so are social issues. All that money that Mark Zuckerberg is throwing at the Newark schools, for instance, may as well have been tossed into the wind -- social issues are the biggest hindrance to school performance there. But back to California -- our system of funding public education is broken and desperately needs reform. What that reform should be, however, I can't tell you, and even if I could, legislators and special interests would mess it up! But there DOES need to be more pressure on Sacramento because that's where things are badly broken.
Joe Capote
12:50 pm on Friday, December 10, 2010
The other options in San Bruno that are currently being discussed are the consolidation of district property, such as the district office. Not sure how the revenue from a lease would work out but proceeds from a sale would have to go back into capital improvements (unless the district gets an exception from the State Allocations Board, which it has done with it's current fund 40 allocations). I am not aware of any official discussion of a possible charter school scenario, except that Belle Aire has entered it's fourth year of PI and a charter school is one possible option.
I'm not hearing a lot of support for a parcel tax or a geo bond, especially without a sunset date. The jobs budget was supposed to help, but I'm not sure that ever passed.
Prop 98/13 reform is always discussed but never an option.
Here is a good overview of how basic aid districts work, their advantanges and their disadvantages. The district has a done a series of presentations on how education funding works and I don't think they have posted those slides yet.
http://iusd.org/district_services/fiscal_services/documents/WhatDoesitMeantobeBasicAid.pdf
Heidi Beck
7:58 pm on Friday, December 10, 2010
Consolidation of district property would probably realize some small savings; however, the idea that someone is going to want to lease that district office with the glut of space that's available is questionable. We need some serious reform at the state level, and property taxes SHOULD be reexamined -- if not for homeowners, then for commercial property. Houses sell more often than commercial properties, so they get reassessed more frequently. So in a trend mirrored elsewhere in the state, homeowners in San Mateo and Santa Clara counties now pay about two-thirds of all property taxes, double that of commercial property owners and up from only half before Prop. 13. Jennifer Bestor of Menlo Park, a former high-tech exec who is now raising a family, has proposed that commercial properties should be reassesssed every 20 years regardless of whether or not they are sold. Now that's an example of some creative thinking.
But all we get is "tax reform is the third rail -- no one will touch it." But we have to start somewhere, because reform is necessary. But how??? Just this week a new AP poll was released, and here's how the AP story starts: "The public verdict is in and overwhelming: The better the education people get, the stronger the U.S. economy will be, a poll shows. But don't count on folks to support higher taxes to improve schools." Read more: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101209/ap_on_re_us/us_education_poll_college_grad_rates
What do we do???